Intel Core i5-14400F vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core i5-14400F and the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H is decisive in favor of the mobile chip, but not without notable exceptions. The Ultra 7 356H wins 14 of the 17 recorded benchmarks, while the i5-14400F takes 3. The most significant single-core result, however, belongs to the desktop part.

In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i5-14400F scores 3055 against 2040 for the Ultra 7 356H, a 49.8% advantage. This is the largest percentage gap in either direction across the entire benchmark set. The i5-14400F also wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 21645 versus 18395, a 17.7% lead. The third win for the desktop chip comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it posts 307 against 303, a slim 1.3% margin.

The Ultra 7 356H dominates the remaining workloads, often by substantial margins. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 12153 against 9090, a 25.2% advantage. The same percentage gap appears in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the Ultra 7 scores 1715 versus 1283. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 28.6% lead for the Ultra 7, with scores of 3055 and 2181 respectively.

PassMark results reinforce the pattern. The Ultra 7 356H leads in floating point math with 103128 against 61319, a 40.5% gap. In physics, it scores 2895 versus 1523, a 47.4% advantage. Prime number finding shows the largest delta of the entire comparison: 327 versus 86, which is a 73.7% lead for the Ultra 7. Data encryption favors the Ultra 7 at 26345 versus 16949, a 35.7% margin. Extended instructions score 27898 against 19937, a 28.5% gap. Multi-thread performance sits at 33978 versus 25470, a 25% lead for the Ultra 7.

Smaller but consistent wins for the Ultra 7 include data compression (336177 versus 315521, 6.1%), random string sorting (40990 versus 32680, 20.3%), and integer math (83111 versus 81524, 1.9%). Single-thread performance in PassMark goes to the Ultra 7 at 4072 versus 3701, a 9.1% lead.

The aggregate benchmark score confirms the hierarchy. The Ultra 7 356H records an average benchmark score of 41215, while the i5-14400F averages 32279. In percentile terms, the Ultra 7 sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs, against the 83rd percentile for the i5-14400F. The nearest rival to the i5-14400F is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840U with an average score of 32233 and a delta of 0.1%, while the AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS sits 0.2% above it. The Ultra 7 356H's closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 with an average score of 41208 and a delta of 0%, followed by the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H at 41263 with a delta of -0.1%.

Where Each One Wins

The data splits the two processors along clear workload lines. The i5-14400F wins in Cinebench R23 single-core, Cinebench R23 multi-core, and Cinebench R15 single-core. These results indicate that the desktop chip delivers stronger performance in newer Cinebench revisions, particularly in single-threaded rendering tasks. The 49.8% lead in R23 single-core is the standout result for the i5-14400F, suggesting that applications relying on high-frequency single-thread performance will favor this part.

The Ultra 7 356H wins across the rest of the benchmark suite, covering older Cinebench revisions and the entire PassMark test set. Its wins span integer math, floating point math, physics simulation, data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number calculation, random string sorting, multi-thread throughput, and single-thread PassMark performance. The margins range from a narrow 1.9% in integer math to a dominant 73.7% in prime number finding.

For workloads involving heavy floating point or physics calculations, the Ultra 7 356H is clearly ahead. The 40.5% gap in floating point math and the 47.4% gap in physics indicate strong computational throughput for scientific or simulation workloads. Encryption performance also favors the Ultra 7 with a 35.7% lead, which matters for security-related tasks. Data compression shows a modest 6.1% advantage, while integer math is nearly tied at 1.9%.

The i5-14400F does not win any PassMark test. Its wins are confined to Cinebench, which suggests that its advantage is specific to rendering workloads, particularly in the newer R23 version. The Cinebench R23 multi-core win of 17.7% is notable given that the Ultra 7 356H wins the older R15 and R20 multi-core tests by 28.6% and 25.2% respectively. This inconsistency across Cinebench versions points to workload-specific scaling behaviors rather than a general performance advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures and target different market segments. The i5-14400F is a desktop part built on Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-R refresh, and belongs to the Core 14th Gen series. The Ultra 7 356H is a mobile processor based on Panther Lake, belonging to the Core Ultra Series 3 with the Panther Lake-H generation. The process node differs substantially: the i5-14400F uses Intel's 10 nm process, while the Ultra 7 356H uses a 3 nm process.

Core counts differ in both number and configuration. The i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads, while the Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The i5-14400F therefore supports hyper-threading while the Ultra 7 does not, as indicated by the equal core and thread counts. Both processors boost to 4.70 GHz, but the base clocks differ: the i5-14400F runs at 2.50 GHz while the Ultra 7 356H runs at 1.90 GHz. The thermal design power also differs, with the i5-14400F rated at 65 W and the Ultra 7 356H at 25 W.

Cache hierarchies are not identical. The i5-14400F has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 356H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The die size for the i5-14400F is 215 mm², while no die size is recorded for the Ultra 7 356H. Both use Intel as the foundry.

Memory support diverges. The i5-14400F supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration and includes ECC support. The Ultra 7 356H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, also dual-channel, but does not support ECC. The Ultra 7 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while no memory bandwidth figure is listed for the i5-14400F.

PCI Express connectivity differs in lane count. The i5-14400F provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 7 356H provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes. The i5-14400F has no integrated graphics, while the Ultra 7 356H includes Intel Xe3 Graphics. The socket types are different as well: the i5-14400F uses Intel Socket 1700, and the Ultra 7 356H uses Intel BGA 2540. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Release timing and pricing also differ. The i5-14400F was released on January 7, 2024 with a launch MSRP of $196. The Ultra 7 356H was released on January 4, 2026 with no launch MSRP recorded. Both processors are listed as active in production.

The Verdict

The benchmark data gives the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H a clear overall advantage. It wins 14 of 17 tests, holds a higher average benchmark score (41215 versus 32279), and sits at a higher performance percentile (87th versus 83rd). It also achieves these results at a 25 W TDP against the i5-14400F's 65 W TDP, a substantial efficiency gap. The Ultra 7 356H is the stronger choice for most compute-intensive workloads, including floating point math, physics, encryption, and multi-threaded PassMark tasks.

The Intel Core i5-14400F is the better choice specifically for Cinebench R23 workloads, where it leads by 17.7% in multi-core and 49.8% in single-core. Its win in Cinebench R15 single-core is marginal at 1.3%. For rendering workloads based on newer Cinebench versions, the desktop part is ahead. It also offers ECC memory support and DDR4 compatibility, which the mobile chip lacks.

The architecture differences explain much of the result. The Ultra 7 356H uses a 3 nm process against the i5-14400F's 10 nm process, which contributes to its lower TDP and higher core count. The 16 cores of the Ultra 7, despite lacking hyper-threading, deliver superior throughput in most tests. The larger L1 and L2 caches per core on the Ultra 7 (192 KB and 2.5 MB versus 80 KB and 1.25 MB) likely support its PassMark dominance. The i5-14400F compensates with a higher base clock (2.50 GHz versus 1.90 GHz) and a larger shared L3 cache (20 MB versus 18 MB).

For users prioritizing single-threaded rendering performance in Cinebench R23, the i5-14400F is the data-supported pick. For everything else in this benchmark set, the Ultra 7 356H delivers higher scores. The Ultra 7 also includes integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the i5-14400F requires a discrete GPU. The i5-14400F supports ECC memory and more PCIe lanes (16 versus 12), which matter for specific desktop configurations. The Ultra 7 offers higher memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s and a lower TDP. The data does not support a single universal winner; the choice depends on whether the workload matches Cinebench R23 or the broader PassMark suite.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The Intel Core i5-14400F wins 3.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest margin is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H scores 327 against 86 for the Intel Core i5-14400F, a 73.7% lead.

Q: Which processor performs better in Cinebench R23 single-core?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F performs better in Cinebench R23 single-core with a score of 3055 versus 2040 for the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H, a 49.8% advantage.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F has 10 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has a lower thermal design power?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H has a TDP of 25 W, while the Intel Core i5-14400F has a TDP of 65 W.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H includes Intel Xe3 Graphics. The Intel Core i5-14400F has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i5-14400F uses a 10 nm process. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H uses a 3 nm process.